Impact of Aortic Valve Replacement for Severe Aortic Stenosis on Perioperative Outcomes Following Major Noncardiac Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the incidence of major adverse cardiac events and death among severe aortic stenosis patients with and without aortic valve replacement (AVR) before noncardiac surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated 491 severe aortic stenosis patients undergoing non-emergency/non-urgent elevated-risk noncardiac surgery between January 1, 2000, and December 31, 2013, including 203 patients (mean age, 74±10 years, 63.5% men) with previous AVR and 288 patients (mean age, 77±12 years, 55.6% men) without prior AVR. RESULTS: The incidence of major adverse cardiac events was significantly lower in the AVR group (5.4% vs 20.5%; P<.001), primarily because of the lower incidence of new or worsening heart failure (2.5% vs 17.7%; P<.001), compared with the non-AVR group. No significant differences were observed between the groups with and without AVR in the incidence of death (2.5% vs 3.5%; P=.56), myocardial infarction (0.5% vs 1.4%; P=.48), ventricular arrhythmia (0.0% vs 0.7%; P=.51), or stroke (0.0% vs 0.7%; P=.51) at 30-days. At a median follow-up of 4.2 (interquartile range,1.3-7.5) years, overall mortality was significantly worse in patients without versus with AVR (5-year rate: 57.0% vs 32.7%; P<.001). Symptomatic patients without AVR (n=35) had the worst outcomes overall, including increased 30-day and overall mortality rates, compared with the AVR-group and asymptomatic non-AVR patients. CONCLUSION: In patients with severe aortic stenosis, AVR before noncardiac surgery was associated with decreased incidence of heart failure after noncardiac surgery and improved overall survival without differences in 30-day survival, myocardial infarction, ventricular arrhythmia, or stroke. Preoperative AVR should be considered in symptomatic patients for whom the benefit of AVR is greatest.

Does aortic pulse wave velocity have any prognostic significance in advanced heart failure patients?

Introduction: Noninvasive measurement of arterial stiffness by pulse-wave velocity (PWV) has prognostic value in different sub groups of cardiovascular disorders. We aimed to measure the PWV in advanced heart failure (HF) patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and investigate whether it has any prognostic significance in this group of patients. Methods: Between 2013 to 2015 patients with a diagnosis of advanced HF (LVEF ≤ 30%) scheduled for right heart catheterization (RHC) were included in our study. PWV was measured before RHC in each patient using vascular explorer device (Enverdis GmbH) in catheterization laboratory. The patients were subsequently followed for 6 months and their hospitalization or death (composite of all-cause death/hospitalization) were recorded. Results: A total of 50 patients (38 men) were enrolled. The mean (SD) of age was 45 (16) years. The mean PWV was 6.8 m/s. There was no statistically significant correlation between the PWV and the clinical, echocardiographic and RHC data. The PWV was not different in patients with or without composite of all-cause death/hospitalization (7.3 versus 6.3, P > 0.05). In this study cardiac output (CO) (beta = -0.53, P = 0.02, odds ratio = 0.6, 95% CI = 0.4-0.9), pulse pressure (PP) (beta = -0056, P = 0.03, odds ratio=0.95, 95% CI = 0.89-0.99) and age (beta = -0.045, P = 0.05, odds ratio = 0.96, 95% CI = 0.9-1.001) were independent predictors of composite of all-cause death/ hospitalization. Conclusion: In patients with advanced systolic HF, PWV may not be a good prognostic factor and does not have any added value over previous well known prognostic factors.

Pulmonary Vascular Capacitance as a Predictor of Vasoreactivity in Idiopathic Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension Tested by Adenosine.

BACKGROUND: Acute pulmonary vasoreactivity testing has been recommended in the diagnostic work-up of patients with idiopathic pulmonary arterial hypertension (IPAH). Pulmonary arteriolar capacitance (Cp) approximated by stroke volume divided by pulmonary pulse pressure (SV/PP) is considered as an independent predictor of mortality in patients with IPAH. OBJECTIVES: We sought to evaluate any differences in baseline and adenosine Cp between vasoreactive and non-vasoreactive IPAH patients tested with adenosine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fourteen patients with IPAH and a vasoreactive adenosine vasoreactivity testing according to the ESC guidelines were compared with 24 IPAH patients with nonreactive adenosine test results. RESULTS: There were no statistical significant differences between the two groups regarding NYHA class, body surface area, heart rate, and systemic blood pressure during right heart catheterization. Hemodynamic study showed no statistical significant differences in cardiac output/Index, mean pulmonary artery pressure, pulmonary vascular resistance, and baseline Cp between the two groups. There was a statistical significant but weak increase in adenosine Cp in vasoreactive group compared to non-reactive group (P = 0.04). Multivariable analysis showed an association between Cp and vasoreactivity (Beta = 2, P = 0.04, OR = 0.05 (95%CI = 0.003 - 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: Cp could be considered as an index for the prediction of vasoreactivity in patients with IPAH. Prediction of long-term response to calcium channel blockers in patients with IPAH and a positive vasoreactive test by this index should be addressed in further studies.